2010-2014: A Comparative Evolution of Sustainability Reporting and Its Assurance in Europe and the U.S.A.

Diana-Maria Tînjală, L. Pantea, Alexandru Buglea
{"title":"2010-2014: A Comparative Evolution of Sustainability Reporting and Its Assurance in Europe and the U.S.A.","authors":"Diana-Maria Tînjală, L. Pantea, Alexandru Buglea","doi":"10.1515/tjeb-2015-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The concept of sustainability has evolved to encompass environmental, social and governance issues regarding corporate behaviour. For the last few years, stakeholders have begun putting pressure on companies to report on sustainability issues. Several national and international regulations and standards have been adopted to guide companies in their reporting. To ensure the accuracy and comparability of non-financial data needed for the stakeholders' decision making process, there is an increasing preference for the external assurance of sustainability reporting. The internationally recognized CSR report assurance standards are the International Standard on Assurance Engagements, ISAE 3000, and AccountAbility's AA1000 Assurance Standard (AA1000AS). This study focuses on the evolution of corporate sustainability reporting, using two non-financial indicators: ESG reporting, and Assurance of ESG reporting. The data for the study is based on content analysis of both CSR reports and corporate websites, courtesy of Sustainalytics. We assessed the evolution of the two indicators from June 2010 to February 2014, for 50 listed European companies and 50 American ones. The comparative approach illustrates the different evolutions of sustainability in Europe and the USA, emphasising the need for stronger regulations and guidelines in the USA, similar to those already implemented in European Countries. For the selected time period, US companies are shown to be worse reporters than European ones, having a negligible number of reports externally verified.","PeriodicalId":30596,"journal":{"name":"Timisoara Journal of Economics and Business","volume":"8 1","pages":"48 - 69"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/tjeb-2015-0004","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Timisoara Journal of Economics and Business","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/tjeb-2015-0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Abstract The concept of sustainability has evolved to encompass environmental, social and governance issues regarding corporate behaviour. For the last few years, stakeholders have begun putting pressure on companies to report on sustainability issues. Several national and international regulations and standards have been adopted to guide companies in their reporting. To ensure the accuracy and comparability of non-financial data needed for the stakeholders' decision making process, there is an increasing preference for the external assurance of sustainability reporting. The internationally recognized CSR report assurance standards are the International Standard on Assurance Engagements, ISAE 3000, and AccountAbility's AA1000 Assurance Standard (AA1000AS). This study focuses on the evolution of corporate sustainability reporting, using two non-financial indicators: ESG reporting, and Assurance of ESG reporting. The data for the study is based on content analysis of both CSR reports and corporate websites, courtesy of Sustainalytics. We assessed the evolution of the two indicators from June 2010 to February 2014, for 50 listed European companies and 50 American ones. The comparative approach illustrates the different evolutions of sustainability in Europe and the USA, emphasising the need for stronger regulations and guidelines in the USA, similar to those already implemented in European Countries. For the selected time period, US companies are shown to be worse reporters than European ones, having a negligible number of reports externally verified.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
2010-2014:欧洲和美国可持续发展报告及其保证的比较演变
可持续发展的概念已经发展到包括环境、社会和企业行为的治理问题。过去几年,利益相关者开始向企业施压,要求它们报告可持续发展问题。一些国家和国际法规和标准已被采用,以指导公司的报告。为了确保利益相关者决策过程所需的非财务数据的准确性和可比性,越来越多的人倾向于可持续发展报告的外部保证。国际公认的企业社会责任报告鉴证标准是国际鉴证业务标准、ISAE 3000和问责制的AA1000鉴证标准(AA1000AS)。本研究主要关注企业可持续发展报告的演变,使用两个非财务指标:ESG报告和ESG报告的保证。该研究的数据基于对CSR报告和企业网站的内容分析,由Sustainalytics提供。我们对50家欧洲上市公司和50家美国上市公司在2010年6月至2014年2月期间这两个指标的演变进行了评估。比较方法说明了欧洲和美国可持续发展的不同演变,强调了美国需要更强有力的法规和指导方针,类似于欧洲国家已经实施的法规和指导方针。在选定的时间段内,美国公司的记者表现比欧洲公司差,外部核实的报道数量可以忽略不计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Income Shock and Coping Strategies of Government Workers in Southwest Nigeria: Evidence from the Survey Data The contribution of statistical models in the field of real estate valuation The Central and Eastern European Countries: A Cluster Analysis from a Bioeconomy Perspective Labour Market Challenges: Will There Be “Dystopian” Risks? The Role of Social Media in Enhancing the Activities of SMEs: Case Study in Gwanda Town
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1